Talk:Likud

Center right politics
It is LONG-established (here on Wikipedia, and elsewhere) that Likud is a center-right political party. There are certainly sources that describe it as right-wing which is an umbrella term for anything right of center, which includes center-right politics. That is what it is and it should be included. Just as the Republican Party and Liberal Party of Australia are center right parties. Only recently have some users (whose good faith, I am disappointed to say, I question) have gone on what it appears to be a smear campaign to include the words "right-wing" as much as possible. Reasons written by these editors include things along the lines of "Center right in comparison to whom?" A BBC article outlines the makeup of the parites in the Knesset (describing them as right, left, centrist, religious, etc.). It describes Likud as centre right. An AFP chart showing the makeup of the parliament, drew a half-circle pie chart, with Likud on the right side closest to the center, immediately to the right of Labor and Kadima. A "Fact File" by the largest media corporation in Israel goes into describe the main platform of every major party in Israel. Using words like center-left for the Labor Party, left for Meretz, and what do you know, center right for Likud. So there's that comparison.

Others are "Given current events, it is debatable that they are center right." According to whom? Certainly no significant source (or even an insignificant one I am yet to see). Or just "No way they are center", without any source. To make a long story short: Likud is accepted to be a center-right political party in Israel. The end. --Shamir1 (talk) 22:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The only people that could describe Likud as centre-right are either Likudniks trying to make their party look moderate, or far-right people trying to denigrate it for not being right-wing enough. There is absolutely nothing centrist about the party; it takes a hard line on security issues, a Thatcherist line on economics, and a blurred status quo view on religious issues. Please stop your unilateral edit war. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  23:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I was asked to comment on this issue by Number 57. Actually, I have to completely agree with Shamir here, although sources for the statements would certainly help. Especially important are unbiased Israeli sources (such as the media's political analysts), which as I said in the discussions about Yisrael Beitenu, would be the most reliable and professional sources in this case. Obviously if there are no reliable sources, the argument does not stand up. However, assuming there are sources for both designations, here's why I agree with Shamir:
 * Firstly, we have to ask the question of what defines the right-wing bloc and what defines the left-wing bloc in Israel. On security matters (which is usually how the parties are judged), it's the willingness to create a Palestinian state. The left advocates returning to the 1949–67 borders, while the right does not acknowledge a Palestinian state in any form, and is against any settlement evacuation. The center (led by Kadima) advocates a Palestinian state, but with significantly modified borders vis-a-vis the Green Line. On this issue, the Likud ideology has some rightist elements (no settlement evacuation), but also many clearly centrist elements, like the very idea of a Palestinian state, as well as a strong willingness to develop the Palestinian economy and police.
 * On the religious issue, again, the Likud is right-wing because it supports religious parties and some of their ideas (actually mostly on security issues), but opposes many other ideas, such as larger pensions/child benefits, and takes a centrist stand on the status quo (e.g. their ambivalency on public transportation on Shabbat, again the same stance as Kadima).
 * On the economic issues, the Israeli political system doesn't really have a clear right- and left-wing. Only two parties (Likud and Avoda) have strong economic policies, with Avoda being socialist and Likud being capitalist. If this is taken to mean that Avoda is left while Likud is right, what does that make of the other 10 Knesset parties? Most of the 34 Israeli parties are socialist or similar (i.e. not like Likud), including all the traditional right-wing parties (Haredi and religious-Zionist).
 * I therefore believe that Likud is a center-right party, although what really matters of course is sources. However, I strongly support using more Israeli professional political analysts as sources, and less foreign media outlets that know about as much about Israeli politics as you can find on Google (or Wikipedia for that matter). -- Ynhockey (Talk) 00:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, by 'sources' I didn't mean 'sources that mention that Likud is a right-wing or center-right party', but 'sources that discuss Likud as a right-wing or center-right party', i.e. sources that talk page Likud's ideology specifically. I don't think a media source that says 'the right-wing Likud party was chosen to lead' or something like that. There's obviously a controversy here, and we shouldn't use articles as sources where the author was writing about something else entirely and probably didn't think twice about using whatever term for Likud. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 00:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey Ynhockey. The most comprehensive entries on individual Israeli political parties I have found in English are ones by Ynetnews (owned by Israel's largest media corporation, and the Library of Congress Country Studies. These entries are detailed and read like encyclopedia articles. The Country Studies article can be found here and its other articles on Israel (including other parties) here. The Ynet article can be found here, and for reference, here is a selection of other parties: Labor, Meretz, Kadima, Shas, Israel Our Home, Balad, Hadash. --Shamir1 (talk) 08:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Much less significant (but if you are interested), there are two recent New York Times articles that mention Netanyahu's gravitation toward the political center. I repeat, this really is not significant. Here is the AFP pie chart (would be nice if uploaded) and here is a BBC article that (on the right hand side) breaks down the political parties in power. --Shamir1 (talk) 08:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the sources! It might be worth noting that in these elections specifically, Likud might be sometimes dubbed more righist than it is because it ran jointly with the Ahi, which is not part of the Likud and thus not relevant to this article. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 23:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the question here is whether we place Likud on the Israeli spectrum or go by a general international definition. A Number 57 noted, Likud would meet all right-wing criteria in England, for example. In Israel, it is centrist compared to many other parties, and is evidently somewhat reluctant to form a coalition with them. -- Nudve (talk) 06:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Two words: Avigdor Lieberman. Stop your "center-right" bullshit, i reckon everyone wants to be center because its trendy and because it prevents the "fear of extrems", but when you appoint a racist as a minister, you're not "center" anymore. I could say "Useless massac....sorry", i mean i could say "Cast Lead" too, isn't it? And as someone noticed, Likud is right-wing even for....UK. So i don't even have to give the French classification for this party. It's like saying the republicans are Center and the democrats Left, no one with even the slightest bit of serious would believe you. 161.73.55.141 (talk) 03:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

POV of a different source
My initial edit was based on just the previous diff that looked incorrect, based on my knowledge of pre-Kadima Likud; I am however, less enlightened concerning internal political dynamics in the Bibi era, following the demise of the previous Herut generation. Things change. The edit summary states why I reverted it. My next edit was justified and ref'd to the same source given for the opposite view. I don’t want to argue; I want to edit. My third edit was to meant to defuse it, but also add my two ref’d cents; on BBC, Bibi had just left Peres’s office, and the edit was sourced to an existing ref. I then read and edited critically further thru the page; it seems there is a lot of fluff and little meat. Then I moved on. Upon returning, I find my two ref’d cents were deleted under questionable pretense, based on the edit summary, but that another editor had arrived. I will generally leave this ‘center-right’ fight to others, but consideration of a ref’d American government pov should be included in the discussion, and I will tend to protect its inclusion. This is NPOV, I believe, and I re-inserted it with quotes.

Though not invited, this discussion raises some common points, which I would like to be discussed. I guess the first is why unbiased American government (not political) sources might not be considered important also. Can an American source be that --- they certainly put their money where their mouth is. I don’t know, but their opinions are certainly easily RS’d, particularly with regard to Likud and where they see them as particularly “right”, compared to whom and sometimes why. A second point is the 'source spectrum' from which the term “center” and the 'source spectrum' from which the term “right” are derived, as noted above. In some general terms they could be divided into things economic and every day life and things political with both domestic and international dimensions. I understand there are also many things specifically Israeli and/or Jewish, which I can not fully comprehend, but note some have remained unresolved since the Haskalah, American Jewish assimilation, and the utter failure of a similar attempt in Europe.

As a non-Jewish foreign editor, which might be different than those here, the political side, particularly international, aspects of Likud seem more important in the big picture than they are currently indicated. My personal bias is that Likud tends to earn ‘centrist’ cover from specific domestic economic issues (e.g. non-socialist), but seems to secularly or politically pick and choose on religious issues, as alluded above. I am sure internal sources define the details best, but these issues are often completely absent or replaced by fluff, as they are in America. That is not to say these are unimportant however, as many international RSs attest. One item included not once in the current Likud article is the term Eretz Israel, as well as that specific spelling, which is documented in major English media to the period of Begin’s ‘77 Likud victory. That is said to differentiate the phrase from Eretz Yisrā'el,which should not to be confused with Medīnat Yisrā'el, but absolutely is, including Likud. Another item is the extremely poor link to Revionism hidden in the lower text, but I assume it may be related to the OR currently residing in the past tense usage in the lede here. That appears incorrect, based on WP:Lede, as well as appearing pov’edly mis-leading. I hope this helps explain why I completely agree with #57. It is another RS’able POV that should not be excluded on what seems apparent ownership or other issues.

Since I see my two cents has been deleted again, I hope I will receive a more reasoned collaborative response rather than just an unreasonable deletion. Regards, CasualObserver&#39;48 (talk) 07:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * But then again, maybe not; moved on or ignored. Seems less than collaborative. CasualObserver&#39;48 (talk) 09:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I think it is more accurate to call it a right-wing party rather than a centre-right party. Surely right-wing includes both centre-right and far right and it is therefore more neutral and less contentious to use the more general term if there is disagreement? BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be described as a far-right party, not center-right or just right?
 * The Likud is generally seen as center-right (e.g. - see Bloomberg from 17 April 2019). The Israeli far-right is a different beast entirely - and generally there are very few such members in the Likud itself (there's usually a party or three to the right of the Likud). The left side of the Likud (which varies in size per session, but is generally not insignificant) is generally indistinguishable from the Israeli center (various center parties, or the right side of Labour) - when the now defunct Kadima (a centrist party by definition) split from the Likud it was made up from the Likud's left side with some of Labor's right (e.g. Haim Ramon). Icewhiz (talk) 14:53, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

The use of "secular" in the lead
Should we be using the descriptor of "secular" so prominently in the lead, given its only supported by one citation from 2008? We have other ideologies given for the party, most of which are cited with multiple sources that we could use in the lead instead. This seems to be placing a lot of weight and reliance on a singular and fairly old source when we have better cited alternatives. Helper201 (talk) 23:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

"Centre-Right" description should be removed
The party has moved much to the right under Netanyahu and is almost never cited as "centre-right" these days. I think it should be simply described as right-wing, the party is not far off from Yamina which this wiki describes as "right-wing to far-right". — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWorldThatNeverExisted (talk • contribs) 06:25, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

I disagree, I think there are a lot of center-right factions within Likud. Center-right-to-right-wing is fine policy wise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:C09E:ED01:61C1:6F65:7371:65E3 (talk) 00:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Conservatism or national liberalism at the top of the ideology list
Should conservatism or national liberalism be placed at the top of the ideology list in the infobox? Helper201 (talk) 16:15, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

, I see no evidence of there ever having been a consensus to place national liberalism at the top of the ideology list. Conservatism has more citations including from academic sources. We should go with what reliable sources state over the views and opinions of Wikipedia editors. Helper201 (talk) 19:47, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * , look you made a major change to this article about a prominent party in Israeli politics without reaching a consenous in the talkpage first. I just restore it back from your change. You should revert your edit back while trying to reach a consensous here. You can't change the primary ideology of a party on your own without a consesnus. It also not a citation contest cause Likud has serval ideologies and it BOTH National liberlism and BOTH coservative (in part), if I will now another citation to the other ideologies then I will cahnge the major ideology to another ideology? NO. You added a new citation and changed the major political ideology on your own based on your point of view without anyone agreeing with this change. It also wrong to make this change as I explained in the edit summary. Sokuya (talk) 18:05, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I think conservatism makes much more sense for the Likud than national liberalism, especially in terms of how RS describe the party. The phrase "national liberalism" is unsupported and perhaps a bit misleading to readers who are not familiar with Israeli politics. For both this page and 2022 Israeli legislative election, I would support replacing national liberalism with conservatism. Jacoby531 (talk) 21:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * , actually conservatism was on top before national liberalism, as seen here - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&diff=1006228994&oldid=1006228127 - before any of my recent edits. As I said, there was never any consensus made to have national liberalism at the top. You were the one first asked to take this to the talk page and to stop reverting. Yet you have continued to blatantly ignore this multiple times and be uncooperative and are the only one rejecting or taking any issue with this and are making a big deal out of this when you don't have a consensus and, as said, if you are going to make the argument of reverting back, conservatism was at the top first. You have no leg to stand on here unless you gain a consensus. Helper201 (talk) 00:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * No, it was National liberalism for years! see January 2021 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&oldid=998722735 January 2020 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&oldid=935541469, January 2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&oldid=879537538, January 2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&oldid=759014236, January 2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&oldid=699323267, January 2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&oldid=644279317, January 2014 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Likud&oldid=590181232 If there was a brief period of Conservative on top (as the link you provided) it was reverted back shortly afterward. Clearly National liberalism was on top before your change and kept that way for almost a decade. if you want to change such an imported prefernce you must reach a consensus. I just reverting it back to the way it was before your change. It dosn't matter you asked me to go to talk page fist, its somthing you should had done before any major change in the first place. I dissagree with your change. Sokuya (talk) 10:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * What you are continuing to wilfully ignore is that there was no consensus for having national liberalism at the top. All your saying is "status quo = good", "change = bad". This is not Wikipedia policy or mandated that this has to be followed. You can't use this to dictate that others are not able to change things without consensus for change from what came first, which itself didn't have a consensus in the first place. Helper201 (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Conservatism has been mainly used by scholars to describe Likud. These sources date back to the 1980s, so I'd say that this ideology should be at the top. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:42, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Here's a couple of sources (from 1980s to the present period):
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Vacant0 (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Conservatism - From my understanding, the conservatism label is the one most applied to the party by contemporary RSs, while national liberal is one of those legacy tags that political parties sometimes get stuck with (and sometimes encourage) even decades after shifting ideologies. PraiseVivec (talk) 20:03, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Conservatism is plainly used far more often to describe them. While Google results aren't the be-all-and-end-all, a search for "conservative Likud party", with quotes around the whole thing, turns up twice as many results as "national liberal" "Likud", without the requirement that the two be together as in the first one - that is to say, the Likud party is called the "conservative Likud party" twice as often as the words "national liberal" appear anywhere on any page with it in any context. It appears four times as often as "national liberal" "Likud party". And just glancing over those results makes it clear that within those pages, "conservative" is generally used to describe the party's ideology, whereas "national liberal" is usually just used in reference to its official name. --Aquillion (talk) 17:08, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Conservatism (bot-summoned) Maybe in 1977, when the centre of Israeli politics was in a very different place this just might be debatable, but Likud has always been a party of the right, where on the right has no doubt shifted, but precisely because of those shifts Conservative is best as the primary descriptor.


 * Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 12:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

It's a member of IDU and ECR Party, conservative organizations. Martianmister (talk) 16:57, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 December 2022
- Sergey Kondrashov (talk) 01:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This is an empty request. Lemonaka (talk) 08:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 January 2023
- Sergey Kondrashov (talk) 07:32, 5 January 2023 (UTC)


 * [[File:Political profiling of the statistical areas in the elections to the 25th Knesset.jpg|thumb|מפה המציגה אזורים סטטיסטיים עם תמיכה דומיננטית בכיוון פוליטי מסוים ובמפלגות מובילות.Political profiling of the statistical areas in the elections to the 25th Knesset ]]
 * Likud (ha'Likud) electoral support in the elections to the 25th Knesset.jpg Sergey Kondrashov (talk) 07:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Please add two graphic files that seem relevant to the topic of the article at the very end of the "Knesset" part: Sergey Kondrashov (talk) 07:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think these maps are worth adding to the article. It might be relevant to the election article though. Cheers, Number   5  7  11:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

This article is too Palestinian biased
Members of Likud are never racists. Mureungdowon (talk) 11:31, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Please elaborate on what parts of the article are biased and how you'd like to see them change Totalstgamer (talk) 11:34, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That’s just a lie lol Hattiexo (talk) 17:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

determining a political position
The party's political stance must simply be right-wing. This also applies to overseas cases such as the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan. There are also credible sources that describe the party as far-right (The Dong-A Ilbo is a mainstream media outlet). Lazt9312 (talk) 09:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)


 * In the discussion, if there is no objection, I will simply describe it as the right wing. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't agree that Likud's political position is simply "Right-wing". Likud's political position should quickly be changed to "Centre-right to right-wing". Unlike real right-wing parties like Japan's LDP, Likud does not advocate World War II-related totalitarianism. Likud's political position is clearly center-right, which has long been supported by Wikipedia users. LDP promotes hatred of Koreans, the main victims of World War II, and Japanese nationalism is not irrelevant to fascism. However, Likud is supported by Jews, who are the main victims of World War II. Jewish nationalism and Japanese nationalism can never be on the same line. I think by South Korean political standards the LDP is a far-right party, and Likud is a center-left party. Unlike other conservative parties in Asia, Likud is culturally liberal. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:35, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * America's white liberal elites accuse Israel of being an imperialist. They refrained from criticizing Shinzo Abe, an obvious far-right fascist politician, while criticizing Benjamin Netanyahu, who is close to the moderate liberal. I think this is very anti-Semitic. Japan's armament is an existential threat to South Koreans. Israel has done nothing to blame internationally. The real imperialist is Japan, not Israel. Palestinian supporters who accuse Zionism of being "imperialistic" are silent when Japan torments South Korea with Japanese far-right imperialism, but Israeli supporters passively support South Korea in the conflict between Japan and South Korea. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Dong-A Ilbo is a South Korean conservative media outlet. South Korean conservatives are accused of being "Chinilpa" by South Korean liberals. Israel succeeded in liquidating the Nazis, but South Korea failed to liquidate Chinilpa. Therefore, I think Chosun Ilbo/JoongAng Ilbo/Dong-A Ilbo is more likely to have an right-wing anti-Semitic bias than Hankyoreh/Kyunghyang Shinmun. (Of course, I don't think even South Korean liberals are completely free from anti-Semitism. Some South Korean liberals think Israel's policy toward Palestine is colonial, but it is a completely foolish judgment. Israel is an anti-imperialist country against Japanese imperialism. ) To describe Likud as a 'far-right' in Dong-A Ilbo is just plain anti-Semitism. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:57, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * In fact, documents must be written by source. Not only the Dong-A Ilbo, but also the Kyunghyang Shinmun and Yonhap News were described as far-right.
 * Credible sources describe the party as center-right, right-wing, and far-right. Therefore, it should be portrayed as right-wing.
 * (The Dong-A Ilbo was relatively anti-Japanese among newspapers at the time.) Lazt9312 (talk) 04:40, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Korean sources are unnecessary for articles related to Israeli political parties in the English Wikipedia. English or Hebrew sources are required. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The claim that Likud is a far-right party is nothing more than a prejudice caused by the incitement of Palestinian supporters. Likud is undoubtedly a centre-right liberal party unrelated to the far-right. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Just say they are right-wing without the 'center-' or 'far-'. A Google Scholar assessment shows 10,500 hits for Likud in association with "right-wing", just 1,860 hits for "far-right" and just 1,150 hits for "centre-right" - it's pretty obvious that they are far right right wing, and the sources support this. That their coalitions are far-right is neither here nor there. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Likud is never "right-wing" or "far-right". Let's compare it to other Right-wing parties:
 * Japan's LDP is a fairly far-right party. The LDP denies World War II war crimes and detests Koreans who were severely damaged by the Asian Nazis during World War II. (Here, if we change Koreans to Jews and Japan to Germany, it is a clear neo-Nazi.) LDP politicians visit Yasukuni shrine, where war criminals are buried during World War II. (Imagine a German politician visiting a Nazi shrine.)
 * Poland's PiS/South Korea's PPP blatantly promotes LGBT hatred.
 * Unlike PiS/PPP, Likud doesn't hate LGBT. Also, unlike the LDP/PiS/PPP, Likud does not advocate fascism. Above all, the LDP/PiS/PPP in general are never liberals, but Likud is clearly a liberal. The LDP has a "Liberal" in its party name but is never considered a liberal. Likud has never supported a right-wing policy at the same level as the LDP/PiS/PPP. Mureungdowon (talk) 08:09, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * If Likud is not center-right, then the LDP and PiS should be considered obvious far right. Fumio Kishida is far more fascist than Donald Trump on the Comfort women issue. Donald Trump came to South Korea under the leadership of Moon Jae-in and met with the victims of Comfort Women, which Shinzo Abe strongly criticized Moon Jae-in. Donald Trump never denies the human rights of victims of World War II. Fumio Kishida denies it.## However, Western liberal media refer to Fumio Kishida as a "moderate conservative", while Donald Trump or Benjamin Netanyahu as the "ultra-conservative". Western liberal media have no idea about Asia. Mureungdowon (talk) 08:23, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Without exaggeration, moderate politicians within Japan's LDP are far more ultra-conservative and fascist than Netanyahu. In my view, the LDP is a de facto anti-liberal ultranationalist 'far-right' party, and Likud is an absolute national-liberal 'centre-right' party. Unlike the LDP, which is a real "Right-wing" party, Likud is never considered ultranationalist. (Even many media, report LDP as 'ultranationalist', but Likud does not report it as such.) Mureungdowon (talk) 08:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Conservatives in South Korea, Japan, and Poland are never liberals, even close to semi-fascists. But conservatives in Israel do not deny the value of cultural liberalism, and have nothing to do with fascism. I think the Western media's view of Japan is very right-leaning and the view of Israel is very left-leaning. Muslims are the second largest in the world after Christians. On the other hand, Koreans are far fewer than Jews. Moreover, while Japan is the world's third-largest GDP power that keeps China in check, Israel is not. Japan, a former fascist state, still threatens South Korea militarily, but Israel has never been a fascist state and never threatens Palestinians except for the Hamas issue. Therefore, the 'political correctness' of Western liberal media is limited to certain areas. I am a South Korean liberal. Individual far-right parties are rarely popular in Japan, Poland, and South Korea because far-right forces join the LDP/PiS/PPP. Israel's far-right forces do not join the Likud, exist as individual parties, and form a coalition government with Likud. Japan, Poland, and South Korea are more conservative than Israel. Mureungdowon (talk) 09:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It's doesn't really matter how the political systems of other countries behave or how they compared to Israel; the only thing relevant here is weighing, proportionately, what the reliable sources tell us. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It is quite different to describe Likud directly as the far-right, and to describe some of the parties that are not Likud but make up the right-wing alliance with Likud as the far-right. The second link you've given is mostly not about Likud being the far-right, but about other far-right conservative parties in solidarity with Likud being the far-right. On the other hand, the third link you presented mostly suggests that Likud is center-right. Mureungdowon (talk) 11:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Right-wing is the phrasing in the majority of sources, while sources that refer to the party as center-right are in the minority. Aside from far-right, another term is hard-right . Iskandar323 (talk) 12:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually "right-wing Likud" works pretty well as a full, composite set phrase, both on Scholar, and on Ngrams, where the relative usage becomes plainly apparent. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:22, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * There is a longstanding consensus among users. The 'centre-right' must be maintained for now. Mureungdowon (talk) 12:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Japan is close to the de facto one-party system, and South Korea is close to the de facto two-party system. However, Israel is a total multi-party system. Far-right Japanese will join the LDP, far-right South Korean will join the PPP, but far-right Jews will NEVER join the Likud. Many far-right Jews belong to Takuma, and there are NO far-right Jews in Likud. Unlike the LDP, Likud is by NO means an ultranationalist. I think it's a very anti-Korean and anti-Semitic bias to call Likud a "right-wing", while Western media don't call the LDP a "far-right" or "fascist". Mureungdowon (talk) 12:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * If you want to discuss East Asian politics, go do so on a page about East Asian politics. It's irrelevant here, and the drawing of parallels is just wasted ink. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I will provide a source depicting Likud as far-right for use in discussion.
 * There are also examples of portraying some members of the party as far-right.  }} Lazt9312 (talk) 13:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The second source does not mention far-right at all, and the third does not mention Likud or Netanyahu directly as far-right. WP:SYNTH. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * A second source refers to the party's members as "artnering with the far-right, conservative Benjamin Netanyahu" as far-right.
 * A number of media reasons for treating the party itself as far-right can be additionally presented.
 * https://www.seoul.co.kr/news/newsView.php?id=20190409500152
 * In the midst of voting, the far-right Likud party of current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is fighting a close confrontation with former Chief of Staff Benny Gantz's centrist coalition, the "Blue and White" coalition.
 * https://mobile.newsis.com/view.html?ar_id=NISX20221222_0002132123
 * Report to President Herzog just before the deadline on the 21st
 * All five political parties, including the ruling Likud Party, are far-right
 * The most far-right conservative cabinet in history could be launched
 * https://m.news1.kr/articles/?3590390
 * Ahead of the general elections on the 9th, Netanyahu, who leads the far-right Likud Party, is fighting a close battle with former Army Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, who leads the centrist opposition coalition 'Blue and White'.
 * These media outlets are the country's Associated Press or mainstream media. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * In fact, since there are enough grounds for being far-right, if there are no further objections, it would be better to simply write as a right-winger. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:51, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Likud's Composition is also composed of a centrist party or a center-right party, while there is no far-right party. See Likud. Likud is centre-right to right-wing. Mureungdowon (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * What came before Likud does not necessarily define it. In addition, this should go with what most sources say. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So, let's agree to a simple right-wing description. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:40, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I support to keep only right wing as Iskandar323 provided scholar hits that 10k! put them on right wing and 1k to centre right? Also far right as little bit more scholar hits against centre right Shadow4dark (talk) 05:59, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 August 2023
In this phrase:

Israel as "threats" and "enemies,".[137][138][139]

Please remove the stray comma. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 00:16, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:14, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

History inaccurate, omits ארגון Irgun • Etzel Orgins
Cf. Irgun entry on Wikipedia.The Likud history and chart are factually inaccurate and incompatible with Irgun Wikipedia article. Also, inconsistency, if Italian Brothers of Italy is (rightly) linked with Mussolini, then Likud which has same individuals as Irgun still living and constituting the party, this omission so egregious and disrespectful of facts, it suggests propaganda or manipulation. (No, I'm not an antisemite. I'm an ethnic Jew, not like Kanye, like Chomsky). Iopis (talk) 02:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's particularly relevant here. It is absolutely relevant to the Herut article, but Likud didn't come into existence until nearly 25 years after Irgun ceased to exist. Number   5  7  15:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Statement relevance to section
It’s not immediately clear why the following statement is relevant to the “Palestinians” section:

“However, it has also been the party that carried out the first peace agreements with Arab states. For instance, in 1979, Likud Prime Minister Menachem Begin signed the Camp David Accords with EgyptianPresident Anwar al-Sadat, which returned the Sinai Peninsula (occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967) to Egypt in return for peace between the two countries.”

My suggestion is to either remove this statement, or replace section header with “Palestinians and Other Arab Nationals” Blockkay (talk) Blockkay (talk) 14:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

LGBT rights under Likud
There needs to be an addition to the article pertaining to Likud under the “Culture” section. This is an important topic that is disturbingly (and likely purposefully) absent from the article at this time. It need to be unlocked so that relevant information can be added by myself or others with sourced and important information. Utahcountypiano (talk) 22:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * See WP:MAKINGEREQ. Sean.hoyland (talk) 08:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Why מחל?
The lead gives the party name in Hebrew, but doesn't explain why the party symbol is mem-chet-lamed when mem and chet aren't in the name. Is someone who knows more able to add this? — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 10:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)


 * The party symbol in Israel ( a combination of 1-3 Hebrew letters) is just an identifier used on voting slips - it doesn't have to include or be related to the party name. So for example in the recent elections Yamina ran using the identifier "ב" - nothing to do with the party name.
 * But in the case of Likud, the party was originally formed as a union between three smaller factions - Herut and (the Chet) the Liberal party (the Lamed) and the National party (Mamlachtiti- the Mem)   Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 17:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks @Kentucky Rain24. Is that something you can source to add to the article? — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 13:41, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't have a source handy, it is personal knowledge, but should be easy to find one. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 01:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * here is one that comes close Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 01:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * forgot the link -https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/a-faction-is-not-a-party-part-2/ Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 01:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you; I have added that to the end of the lead. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 14:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * looks good! I think you should also remove the line about the "Anthem" - it is no such thing, just a one-time election jingle Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know enough about it; I'll let you do that 😊 —  OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 22:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

"Anthem"
Could someone remove the entry for "Anthem"?- it is no such thing, just a one time jingle used for election videos, a long time ago (when Sharon was still the party leader) Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 01:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

“the Arabs” rather than specific countries
The phrase “the Arabs” is used to vaguely refer to some of Israel’s neighbors.

“…reaching agreements with the Arabs…”

The term is extremely vague in this context, also inaccurate and mildly racist.

This should be revised to refer to the specific nation (in this case Egypt.) The agreement the Likud made was with the Egyptians and the Egyptian government, not all Arabs.

Furthermore,

“…suspicion of neighboring Arab nations' intentions…”

is again unnecessary, overly vague and racist. All of Israel’s immediate neighbors are Arabic speaking countries. The only non-Arabic speaking neighbors anywhere close are Turkey and Iran - the Likud are also suspicious of them.

Adding “Arab” makes it less accurate and more racist. 2601:152:800:11A0:A93B:F2B6:51F3:EA0F (talk) 16:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Done Totalstgamer (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

"Anthem"

 * What I think should be changed (format using textdiff):


 * it is not an "Anthem", just a one time jingle used for election videos, a long time ago (when Sharon was still the party leader):
 * References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 20:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Researcher (Hebrew: חוקרת) (talk) 06:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 April 2024
It seems that someone has changed Likud's political position to "right-wing to far-right". I can find no sources that call Likud a far-right party, nor does this article have any sources saying as much. Either A. It should be listed as only right-wing or B. The proper sources should be added to justify this change Sutapurachina (talk) 00:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ I reviewed all 8 citations and did not find a single case where Likud is directly described as far-right. Multiple sources use far-right to refer to the current coalition, or to other parties within the coalition like the Religious Zionist Party, but all of these sources describe Likud as simply right-wing. Since the page is about Likud and not the entire coalition I have removed this from the infobox. Jamedeus (talk) 02:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 July 2024
Reference for the International Democracy Union is Could be added to the infobox. John Kroka (talk) 18:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Rkieferbaum (talk) 03:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)